Deep Space Habitat Primary Structure - A Comparison between Metallic, Inflatable, and Composite Materials
This paper presents a comprehensive trade study comparing metallic, inflatable, and composite primary structure materials for a Mars Transit Habitat module. The study evaluates the impact of these materials on the overall mass, outfitting, and mission complexity of the habitat. T
Selection note: Curated for a comparison of metallic, inflatable, and composite habitat approaches, useful for exposing packaging, mass, pressure, fabrication, inspection, and extensibility tradeoffs.
Evidence boundary: NTRS metadata and abstract summarize the trade; underlying requirements, scoring, and test evidence were not independently audited. It is architecture context, not proof of a preferred structure.
Stable record
ntrs-20240007484
Topic
structures-shielding
Type
Conference Paper
Publisher
Marshall Space Flight Center
Authors
Matthew T. Ziglar; Michael Elsperman
Year
2024
Editorial state
metadata curated editorial draft
Reviewer
GShips Project editorial synthesis
Official link checked
2026-07-25
Source-supplied abstract
This paper presents a comprehensive trade study comparing metallic, inflatable, and composite primary structure materials for a Mars Transit Habitat module. The study evaluates the impact of these materials on the overall mass, outfitting, and mission complexity of the habitat. The results show that the composite module outperforms the other options in terms of minimum mass, being 33% lighter than the metallic configurations and 41% lighter than the inflatable option. The study highlights the potential of composite habitats for future space missions and emphasizes the need for further development and testing to increase the Technology Readiness Level.
Abstract text has not been adopted as a GShips conclusion.
What would change this record?
A newer or corrected version, a retraction, a verified duplicate, a material topic mismatch, a changed access state, or claim-level review would trigger a dated editorial update.
NTRS metadata and abstract summarize the trade; underlying requirements, scoring, and test evidence were not independently audited. It is architecture context, not proof of a preferred structure.
Source-supplied titles, abstracts, authors, and dates may require correction against the canonical full text.
What would change this page?
A newer or corrected version, retraction, verified duplicate, material topic mismatch, changed access state, or claim-level assessment would change this record.
People, review, and conflicts
Prepared by
GShips Project
Editorial status
metadata-curated-editorial-draft
Editorial reviewer
GShips Project editorial synthesis
Last editorial review
No editorial-review date recorded
Independent review
pending
Independent reviewer
No independent reviewer assigned
Last independent review
No independent-review date exists
Last content edit
Not recorded separately
Official source or link verified
2026-07-25
Declared conflicts
The maintainer intends to explore a commercial venture based on some GShips work. No entity, outside funding, customer, sponsor, or indexed-organization relationship currently exists.